"Finally, I would
like to thank Theron Raines and Paul Zack, literary agents
who tried very hard to find a publisher for this book but
failed. Mr. Raines gave up after two years, and Mr. Zack
after a year and a half. I have lost count of the number of
rejection letters they gathered from well-re­garded
publishing houses, but can only conclude from their lack of
success that this book is unfit for commercial publication
in the United States."

And
Taylor is certainly adept at shining a spotlight through
today`s pervasive mental fog. As he explains in his lucid
prose:

"This book is about
racial identity, something most people who are not white
take for granted. They come to it early, feel it strongly,
and make no apologies for it."

Taylor, who lived in
Japan
until he was 16, has the perspective afforded by deep
immersion into a sophisticated non-Western culture,
something rare among American intellectuals. In
White Identity, Taylor notes,

"…
Japan is homogeneous. This means Japanese
never even think about a host of problems that torment
Americans. Since Japan has only one race, no one worries
about racism. … When a company needs to hire someone, it
doesn`t give a thought to `ethnic balance,` it just hires
the best person."(VDARE.com
note:links added
to quotes throughout).

"Race
is an insignificant matter and not a valid criterion for any
purpose—except perhaps for
re­dressing wrongs done to non-whites. The races are
equal in every respect and are therefore interchangeable."

The grip of this PC orthodoxy is
remarkable. Before 1992, I had assumed, from having
watched
a lot of sports on TV and having noticed how people in
Chicago, Houston, and
Los Angeles actually
live their lives, that nobody consciously believed
it—that they were just being hypocritical. But, after
discovering Internet discussion groups way back in 1992, I
can attest to the remarkable number of people who believe
these talking points strongly enough to type them into a
computer … anonymously.

The true
White Man`s Burden turns out to be his intellectual distaste
for reality, his need to believe in universal principles,
even (or especially) when they are conspicuously
counterfactual. The more disastrous your ideals, the more
pure your heart must be and the more evil your doubters.

As Taylor has seen, it`s hard for an
East
Asian to be similarly
deluded. In China In World History,
Historian S.A.M. Adshead explained that the Chinese were
long ahead of the West because the
practical Chinese concentrated upon technology and magic
while the idealistic Europeans
believed in theology and science. Over the last half
millennium, the Western obsession with general principles
has proven more useful than the Chinese taste for
miscellaneous knowledge.

But you can have too much of a good thing.
Our latest political theology is now at war with
science and sense. The next half millennium is likely to
go worse for whites relative to the Chinese unless we
modernize our mindsets on race.

As you can see, today`s PC party line is a
farrago of empirical and normative assertions, with moral
panic governing what
your lying eyes are allowed to notice:

"These are matters
on which there is little ground for disagreement; anyone who
holds differ­ing views is not merely mistaken but morally
suspect."

The
reigning upper middle class white view is that everyone
should always act on the basis of
Kant`s categorical
imperative: "Act
only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same
time, will that it should become a universal law."

But what if others don`t obey this
categorical imperative? Well, you should move somewhere
"more appropriate" (i.e., more expensive). If you can`t afford to
get away from large numbers of
non-Asian Minorities, well, then, you`re obviously a
loser.

For Jared Taylor, a man of distinguished
bearing, is unusual among American intellectuals in his
empathy for people at the bottom. Protesting a 2005 Supreme
Court
decision mandating racial integration in prison cellmate
assignments even when prison officials expect diversity
might cause murder or
rape,
Taylor asked:

"Some
would say that racial violence in prisons says nothing about
di­versity as a national goal because the prejudices of the
dregs of society have no relevance for the rest of us. We
should not be so hasty to condemn peo­ple who face
challenges we can hardly imagine. Prisoners must suffer
the
company of strangers in acutely invasive ways … Federal
judges should search their souls before putting men`s lives
at risk in the name of principles they, themselves, probably
do not practice in their own lives."[American
Renaissance, April 2009]

Taylor`s
explanation for the existence of some degree of racial
identity is particularly straightforward:

"Racial
identity comes naturally to all non-white groups. It comes
natu­rally because it is good, normal, and healthy to feel
kinship for people like oneself. … All people of the same
race are more closely re­lated genetically than they are to
anyone of a different race, and this helps explain racial
solidarity."

Now, that`s a little broad. There are odd
cases that crop up where self-identification is at war with
genetics. For example, the President of the United States
recently declared on his Census form that, in effect, he did
not share any racial ties with his
own
half-sister Maya. Of course, as
Obama`s late mother once lamented, Obama had long ago
made "a
professional choice" to identify himself as only
black. The payoff to being considered nonwhite in modern
America is too good to pass up, even you have to
insult many of your blood relatives in the process

Taylor
continues:

"Families are close
for the same reason. Parents love their children, not
because they are the smartest, best-looking, most talented
children on earth. They love them because they are
genetically close to them. They love them because they are a
family. … Most people have similar feelings about race. . …
Non-whites understand this. Blacks call each other `brother`
and `sis­ter.` … Whites used to understand this. In fact, at
some level they still do—their actions betray them."

"These mystic
preferences need not imply hostility towards others.
Par­ents may have great affection for the children of
others, but their own chil­dren come first. "

"Their race is the
largest extended family to which they feel an instinctive
kinship."

This deserves a little more unpacking than
Taylor gives it. It`s perfectly natural to feel an
instinctive kinship with any and all humans under certain
circumstances. Ronald Reagan
used to worry his less imaginative National Security
Advisor, Colin Powell, by musing about how the Cold War
would be over instantly if Earth were ever attacked by space
aliens. Human kinship would
far outweigh ideology if we ever needed to fight
bug-eyed space monsters. Most people would feel a surge of
kinship toward any human on a life raft menaced by sharks.

However,
the flip side of this undermines Taylor`s political project:
namely, that for many whites, group identities smaller than
the Big Four races that Taylor focuses upon (white, black,
Hispanic, and Asian) are more attractive outlets for
identity politics.

For
instance, Taylor notes:

"Columnist
Maggie
Gallagher has written that she thinks of herself as an
American, a Catholic, and sometimes an Irish-American but
adds:

`I hate the idea of
being white. . . . I never think of myself as belonging to
the `white race.` … I can think of few things more degrading
than being proud to be white.`

But the point is that, yes,
Irish
ethnocentrismis
vastly more acceptable in the modern Main Stream Media
climate than white ethnocentrism. Senator Ted Kennedy`s
absurd but still ongoing diversity visa lottery was referred
to by Congressmen as
"The
Irish Program" because Kennedy had been so frank
that his main intention was to import Irishmen to vote for
future Kennedys.

Of course, many whites don`t have a
socially acceptable subracial identity like Irish. The huge
numbers of German-Americans are discouraged from engaging in
identity politics.
Italian-Americans are allowed to take pride in Italian
culture (cuisine, opera, Mafia movies, tanning, steroids)
but they tend to be too family-oriented to politically
organize on a mass scale like the Irish. Founding-stock
Americans, and the large number of people of
mixed-nationality Catholic backgrounds in northern
metropolises who vote and act like them, can`t really claim
a single acceptable ethnicity. Interestingly, events like
NASCAR racing seem
to
serve as a covert ethnic pride rally—what
Kevin
MacDonald has
called an
"implicit white community"—for people who aren`t allowed
to hold ethnic pride rallies.

On the
other hand, lots of whites, especially the most influential
and wealthy, do have politically useful ethnicities.

In his
pointillist style, Taylor offers a vast array of data, both
quantitative and anecdotal, to support his contention that
race plays a large and inevitable role in daily life.
Chapters are devoted to racial consciousness among blacks,
Hispanics, and Asians.

Since
many of his examples are drawn from my native Los Angeles, I
am able to confirm their validity. For example, Taylor
writes:

"In
March 2005, there was a riot involving 200 to 400 Armenian
and Hispanic students at Grant High School in Los Angeles. …
The school`s dean, Daniel Gruenberg, explained that there
had been similar eth­nic battles at least once a year for
more than a decade."

Grant H.S. is in a fairly nice part of the
San Fernando Valley, just north of tony Sherman Oaks, home
to numerous character actors and screenwriters. You`ve seen
dozens of
TV shows filmed on Grant`s campus. I`ve shot hoops at
the high school`s gym on and off since the 1970s.

Is Taylor overstating how long this
history of mass violence between
Armenians and Mexicans has gone on at Grant?

No—he`s
understating it. A
2000 article in the
L.A. Times reported:

"John Salapa`s
ninth-graders have been at Grant High for only two months,
but they have already learned a few things. … And they know
what October means: fights between Armenian Americans and
Latinos …`It`s a tradition,` one said. `That`s why they call
it the October riots. They probably schedule it.`"[Program
Seeks to Reduce Latino-Armenian Tensions at School,
By Hilary E. MacGregor, October 22, 2000]

Why? The LA Times`
MacGregor continued:

"For as long as most
people there can remember, tensions between Armenians and
Latinos at Grant have flared in late October. The
3,300-member student body, representing 32 cultures, is one
of the most diverse in the San Fernando Valley. … One
district official speculated that tension between the Latino
and Armenian students may have originated from disputes over
relief efforts in the mid-1980s after earthquakes in Mexico
and Armenia. At the time, students from each ethnic group
claimed that the other received more empathy and relief …"

But that
mid-1980s dispute had to have been an effect rather than a
cause of racial hatred between Armenians and Mexicans,
because I can recall the two groups already rioting at Grant
in the mid-1970s, when I was attending Notre Dame H.S. two
miles away.

This
obscure history validates Taylor`s view of human nature. He
points out that in the optimistic 1950s,

"Discussions about how blacks and whites were to be brought
together came to be known as `contact theory` … Schools were
the best setting for contact. White children, whose
prejudices had not yet hardened, would mix with black
children under
conditions of equality and strict institutional
supervision."

Well,
Grant H.S. offers an interesting test of contact theory,
since it doesn`t involve blacks and whites, but Armenians
and Mexicans. It`s hard to blame friction between Armenians
and Mexicans on slavery or Jim Crow or outmoded stereotypes
or white racism. Indeed, they are a lot less distinctive in
looks than are blacks and whites. But they fight anyway.

The 2010
Census results show that a number of tracts north of
Grant H.S. are getting whiter. The Armenians, and other
ex-Soviet immigrants who follow their lead, are winning,
pushing out Latinos.

A few
years ago, I was walking around the Valley Glen neighborhood
near Grant, amazed by the extraordinarily expensive 8-foot
security fences topped with
lethal finials that homeowners were erecting along the
sidewalks. "How can
Mexicans afford these crazy fences?" I wondered to
myself. It was only on a second visit that I realized the
people turning their yards into fortified bunkers were
Armenians.

As far as I can tell, the maximum
front-yard fence allowed in Los Angeles is
3`6" tall, so these maximum security prison fences are
illegal. But government officials don`t like to mess with
Armenians because they exhibit so much racial solidarity.

This bit of history raises several
questions relevant to
White Identity.

For
example: are Armenians
white?

As a middle-aged Californian, I`d say,
"Of course."
Traditionally in California, Armenians were automatically
assumed to be white. When
Republican George Deukmejian beat Democrat Tom Bradley
in the 1982 and 1986 gubernatorial elections, the story was
always summed up as: White Guy Beats Black Guy.

Lately, however, I`ve noticed Armenians
referring to non-Armenians as
"whites."

Taylor
leaves strategically vague the issue of who exactly would be
in the white tent. If Armenians are in, what about Turks,
Persians, Arabs, and Indians? What about Latin Americans who
are primarily European in ancestry?

Personally, I want the biggest political tent possible for
people like myself who don`t get special legal or cultural
privileges based on their race. I`d certainly rather have
Armenians on my side than on the other side.

Yet there are advantages to a small tent,
too. Many Armenians like having an Armenia-sized tent. The
main goal of
Armenian-American political activism is to persuade the
U.S. government to stick it to their hereditary enemies back
in Asia. Thus, they really wouldn`t want to get lumped in
with, say, their neighbors from the Old Country, the Turks
and Azeris, even though they look much alike.

But, the more relevant question in 2011
is: why would
Armenians want to be white? What`s in it for them to
identify primarily as white rather than as Armenian?

"No politician would
dare examine legislation by asking what was in it for
whites. No city in America has … a white caucus on the city
council. Across the political spectrum, Ameri­cans assert
that any form of white racial consciousness or solidarity is
de­spicable. … They have dismantled and condemned their own
racial identity in the expectation that others will do the
same."

Imagine
if the three decades of fighting at Grant H.S. if the
Armenian rioters had been fighting in the name of the white
race instead of the Armenian race.

Well, Grant H.S. isn`t on the road from
Natchez to Natchitoches, like Jena, it`s in the heart of the
entertainment industry. There`s a film crew there every
month.

If white
kids at Grant had been attacking Mexicans for three decades,
and if their white parents were putting up vicious fences to
impale Mexicans and send the message that Mexicans aren`t
wanted in the neighborhood, it would be a national scandal.

But two generations of whites at Grant
haven`t been
rioting in the name of whiteness, they`ve been rioting
in the name of Armenianness. So it`s more or less okay. It`s
not considered good, but it`s not something the MSM much
worries about. It doesn`t fit The Narrative.

The Narrative? As Pulitzer Prize-winner
Stephen Hunter
explained in a recent novel:

"The narrative is
the set of assumptions the press believes in, possibly
without even knowing that it believes in them. It`s so
powerful because it`s unconscious. It`s not like they get
together every morning and decide `These are the lies we
tell today.` No, that would be too crude and honest. Rather,
it`s a set of casual, nonrigorous assumptions about a
reality they`ve never really experienced that`s arranged in
such a way as to reinforce their best and most ideal
presumptions about themselves and their importance to the
system and the way they have chosen to live their lives."[I, Sniper: A Bob Lee Swagger Novel,
2009Page
183]

Main
Stream Media attempts to fit Armenians into The Narrative go
something like this:

They`re
an immigrant group, they`re from the Middle East, and they
are socially troubled (as demonstrated by their elevated
crime rate). That`s good!

But—they`re white, Christian, do well in school, make lots
of money, don`t cause many other local problems besides
shooting each other, their immigrants` international
organized crime ties are not something we want to dwell on,
they`re often Republicans, and it`s hard to remember whether
Armenians` foreign policy obsessions match up with Israel`s
latest needs (which side is
Turkey on these days?), which could get us in big
trouble. That`s bad…

So,
Armenians are complicated. They don`t fit well into The
Narrative. Therefore, let`s
not think about Armenians!

But, white people aren`t supposed to say:
we`re doing this "to
promote the general welfare" of
"ourselves
and our posterity" (to quote the
Constitution`s Preamble). Whites aren`t supposed to say that—and they don`t
like to, either. They like to come up with some principled
reason, such as: the philosophy of
Ayn
Rand says so.

Thus, the GOP`s bright young man, Paul
Ryan,
managing to totally miss the point, announced a plan
privatizing Medicare. (Older heads in the House GOP are
slowly walking that one back.)

Nevertheless, an explicit white identity
movement is unlikely to be tolerated. It`s not so much that
blacks, Asians, and Hispanics don`t want this to happen.
None of these groups are really all that powerful. Blacks
tend to be colorful but not too competent; East Asians
competent but
colorless; Latinos culturally lethargic and
unenterprising.

No, the
much more serious roadblock to the emergence of white
identity politics:
more Jews don`t want it to happen than do want it to happen.

Many Jews have strong reasons for their
aversion to white identity politics, either irrational (the
Cossacks are coming!) or rational (what`s in it for
me?).

Perhaps Taylor can persuade enough Jews to
get onboard to make white identity respectable in the MSM
and thus with the media`s consumers, the public. He`s
striven manfully and graciously over the years to make Jews
feel welcome in his movement and many Jews have
written for American
Renaissance.

I did
propose conceding permanent quotas for the descendants of
American slaves. That`s a high cost, but one we`re likely to
pay anyway.

Is my
philosophy extolling solidarity among American citizens
rather than among whites likely to prove more acceptable to
the media gatekeepers that Taylor`s white advocacy?

Sure—in the sense that a two percent
probability is twice a one percent probability. You`ll note
that, after all these years, I`m still using quotes around
"citizenism"
because nobody knows what the word is. It hasn`t exactly
swept the intellectual world.

This is a pretty depressing way to wrap
up. But I do think it`s safe to say that the conventional
wisdom will change when it
has to change. It
probably won`t change until it has to, but it will have to
when it has to.